Talk:Lohkar (NBZP)
Nickname wording I thought it was pretty clear. For the "from/because of" thing, I've personally come across all sorts: due to, with regard to, thanks to, for - in fact, I think "for" works best in the situation. As for the last line, what else could it be referring to? (By the way, "visible anagram" is sort of a tautology). -- Ghosthands (talk| ) 21:43, September 25, 2011 (UTC) (Shrugs) Your page, you decide (as long as it's grammatically correct; I just like to see what I feel most appropriate in the right places, see). I merely like to see things the way I see them as being the most appropriate and suggest them, yeah? No biggie either way. Admittedly, you are correct. There is nothing else it could be referring to in this case. On the other hand, this is a wikia. And the best wikis I've seen on the web go completely out of their users' ways to make everything absolutely clear. I understand that you may feel my definition of 'best' in consideration to wikis is quite stupid; however, I believe that this is clearly a matter of law vs. intent. Although it's technically not against the''' law ' of a wikia to put its wording in such an order that it makes the information immediately clear to one reading it, it is against the' intent of a wiki, its purpose, to provide information in such a way that its message takes a good second of thought to get across. And as for the tautology claim, first off, I fail to comprehend how something can be 'sort of' in the manner you refer to it as being here. Quite obviously, this expression is either a tautology or it isn't. As well, not all anagrams are near-immediately visible, which I meant and am sorry for not clarifying; for example, the letters of 'Clint Eastwood' can be rearranged to form 'Old West Action'-woah, didn't see that one coming. No, really xP But I digress. Der Blitzmann 22:20, September 25, 2011 (UTC) Haha, good one ;) Don't take things so literally :P. My point was that all anagrams are visible; it isn't possible for them to be undetectable anagrams! Whether they are easily discernible is another matter, and I agree there, but they're still visible regardless of how clearly they can be made out. And I used the words "sort of" as a way of gently introducing the idea, so as not to seem to impetuous. Hang on, your wording (ironically enough) wasn't terribly clear there; do you mean wikis do or don't want to make everything as clear as they possibly can? Oh, great, now we're in the midst of a great linguistic and philosophical debate XD -- Ghosthands (talk| ) 22:35, September 25, 2011 (UTC) In answer to your question (a question that wasn't directed at me, but I'll ignore that for now. :P), wikis generally try to make everything as clear as possible. And yeah, his wording didn't seem very clear to me either. However, if there is one thing I've learned from school, it's how to find the most crucial information from a block of text and to ignore everything else. :P ckmc (talk) 22:47, 9/25/2011 22:47, September 25, 2011 (UTC) Ugh, what? That's perfectly clear! Nothing to complain about, unlike all those other times- (Re-reads the darn thing) ''(Headesks) '' M'bad. For all my self-proclaimed linguistic ability (read: evidently, not that much), my manipulation of speech often is off, which results in occurrances like this one. I apologize. Quite ironic, yes? Bwaharharhar, I c what u did thar naow, Geisthaende (German for 'Ghosthands' in case you don't know Deutsch, mind if I call you that?) A worthy opponent indeed-indeed, that is, too worthy for a gibbering old 'un such as mine self XP I underestimated ya'll's prowess, f'give me. Thou mayst carry on with yer introducing style of 'sort of'-not that I control if you do that or not, of course XP Ja, you have a point. My intent, though, was to state that the anagram is very readibly visible for chars and other people-it doesn't 'stretch' the average brain to figure it out, really. I mean, I don't know the intelligence of the guy(s) who calls Lohkar a Lohrak, but a lot of chars only have moderate to low intelligence-either that, or they've got 160+ IQ ( ;_; ) and thus would probably not be smart enough to figure out how to rearrange more complex and less easily discerned anagrams, or even gain anything from the practice of doing so unless if it was a puzzle needed to save the world, etc. in the first place. Oh, and about the debates thing- '''Don't worry. This is perfectly normal. I start debates all the time, Ghosthands no danna. xP Der Blitzmann 23:16, September 25, 2011 (UTC) Natuerlich kann ich Deutsch! ;) I don't mind at all, since I often think of it as "Geisthaende" anyway! Alternatively you could call me "mains-d'un-fantome", or "manusumbrae", or even "phantasmacheiroi", to quote the languages I know :P I know what you mean about the whole manipulating-speech thing. I think one problem with people who do have a great deal of linguistic skill or indeed intelligence in any technical area is that they express themselves in a way that is perfectly clear to them, but to others without such knowledge, it seems incomprehensible. No worries :) -- Ghosthands (talk| ) 06:01, September 26, 2011 (UTC) Ocoolthnx. E, French isn't my thing, Latin isn't, either, and even if that last one does happen to be Portugese, I don't like that, too. So no, I'll stick with Deutsch. Yeah, I'm just in a regular conversation with my friends, and they go: 'Wait, why are you speaking in English, German, Spanish, and Japanese with a Southern accent?' XP But now we're getting off-topic :{ No more from me, save if I ever see you on AIM. Der Blitzmann 10:53, September 26, 2011 (UTC)